Strategic National 2012 Michigan Republican Primary Poll
- Mitt Romney 24.4%
- Mike Huckabee 18.8%
- Sarah Palin17.1%
- Newt Gingrich 10.2%
- Tim Pawlenty 3.5%
- Rick Santorum 1.9%
- Jon Huntsman 1.5%
- Mitch Daniels 1.0%
- Haley Barbour 0.6%
- Undecided 21.0%
The GOP Primary survey had a total of 480 respondents, 50% female and 50% male, and a margin of error of +/- 4.5%.
January 28th, 2011 at 1:20 pm
Michigan can’t go soon enough on the calendar. My guess is that they will go the Arizona (and Florida?) route and hold their primary before Super Tuesday.
Mitt’s strength in Michigan is a major part of the 2012 equation. PPP, if I recall correctly, had Mitt and Huck tied in the state. LOL!!
January 28th, 2011 at 1:23 pm
Hi All,
Ties in with today’s Mitchell Research poll :
Romney 28 %
Huckabee 15 %
Palin 10 %
Paul 10 %
CraigS
January 28th, 2011 at 1:33 pm
Yep, PPP showed Huckabee and Romney tied with 22% each in their KosKids version of reality. Two legitimate polls now show what real life is like – Romney leading Huck well outside the MoE in both.
Let’s stop talking about and lending legitimacy to PPP now… the only people who seem to care about PPP are Huckabee supporters who cling to PPP polls as the only hope for their candidate.
January 28th, 2011 at 1:33 pm
Only 24% in MI? I wouldn’t be celebrating that if I were a Romneyite. Michigan is supposed to be the great Mitt firewall in the Midwest, but he isn’t exactly blowing the competition away.
January 28th, 2011 at 1:42 pm
Uh, that Mitchell Research poll only polled 250 people and was conducted between December 30 and January 1-2. So it’s dated and the sample size was incredibly small.
Romney won 39% of the vote in Michigan in 2008.
January 28th, 2011 at 1:44 pm
“Romney leading Huck well outside the MoE in both.”
You need to brush up on MoE — it applies to both numbers. Romney, Huckabee, Palin, and Undecided are all within MoE in the SN poll.
I agree, Jonathan — a surprisingly poor showing for Romney in one of the few primary states he won last time.
He does better in the Mitchell Poll (at least in comparison to Huckabee/Palin), but even there 28% isn’t impressive.
January 28th, 2011 at 1:56 pm
Jonathan and Jumbo
Try to remember that 2008 had , like most primaries, a few candidates. These polls have 10 or more candidates, so it is impossible to really compare 2008 to these early polls. I’m sure a 13 % lead in a poll with 10 options will easily translate into a fairly similar Romney primary result in 2012 compared to 2008, in Michigan
CraigS
January 28th, 2011 at 1:57 pm
It was never realistic to suppose that Mitt wouldn’t win Michigan, and the state went early last time for a reason….it wanted to boost Mitt’s campaign, and it resurrected it…..at least until the loss in Florida.
The DailyKos poll, however farcical, did create some concern. What isn’t realized is Mitt’s Republican Party organizational strength in the state. It’s the reason McCain, Huckabee, and Giuliani couldn’t get anywhere in pre-Primary polls and wound up leaving the state before the contest last time.
January 28th, 2011 at 2:19 pm
CraigS:
That argument would hold water if all the candidates were polling, say 5-10%. But, the only ones who are polling above the margin of error are the Big Four. Using margin of error, you could eliminate 5 of the contenders.
I don’t want to start manipulating numbers (my math isn’t good enough to do that), but I would just assume that Romney would be polling at least 30% in one of his biggest states from 2008.
January 28th, 2011 at 2:21 pm
Craig,
You might have missed it but the sample size for that Mitchell Communications poll is half the size of this poll. The Mitchell poll was only 250 Republicans while this poll is of 480 Republican primary voters. Polls that have more respondents are more reliable. The PPP poll was of 400 voters.
It’s also dated. It was conducted December 30, January 1-2. Those dates aren’t really the best dates to poll in general but a lot has happened in this last month. This poll was conducted between January 24-25.
I’d be very worried if I were Romney actually. Palin and Huckabee account for 36% of the vote with 21% undecided. If one of them stays out, the other stands to gain dramatically as Romney will likely not get more than 15% of supporters for either of them.
What people don’t realize is that 38-39% is going to win in any of the early states. Obama, Clinton, McCain, Huckabee never broke that number in the early states (Romney didn’t either in Michigan).
January 28th, 2011 at 2:36 pm
Congratulations to Mitt and his supporters. That moves Mitt up 1/2 notch in my state polling chart. (from tie to a win)
I was pleasantly surprised with the PPP polling last time – and thought it could be off – but of course I liked the possibility. Much like I’m sure Mitt’s supporter liked the possibility of Mitt being tied for 2nd/3rd in the NC poll that was done in Dec.
For the record, there has been recent polling in Iowa done by at least two companies that showed fairly similar results. PPP wasn’t that far off from the Strategic National poll done a week or two later. (PPP: Huckabee 30%, Romney 18%; Strategic National Huckabee 27.56%, Romney 18:54%) Because PPP does rounding to the nearest whole number – if Strategic National did the same (28 to 19) there is only a 3 point difference between the two polls.
Using the difference between the two for Michigan; the PPP poll had them tied at 22% – meaning a difference of 2.4 points for Romney and a difference of 3.2 points for Huckabee from the Strategic National poll. Isn’t that within their MOE?
January 28th, 2011 at 3:01 pm
This poll is closest to reality. A small Romney lead with Huckabee 2nd, Palin 3rd, and Gingrich 4th. Pawlenty is probably a few points higher than 3%.
January 28th, 2011 at 3:07 pm
Jumbo and Jonathan
Actually, with the MOE, Romney is polling as high as 30 + % in the Mitchell poll. As to the small sample……all the polling has small samples, except the actual primaries themselves. I seriously doubt that Romney is the slightest bit concerned about Michigan and this polling.
CraigS
January 28th, 2011 at 3:28 pm
NC and WV numbers out. Last 3 NC polls have been a rollercoaster ride.
January 28th, 2011 at 3:28 pm
#13
Under your reasoning, a poll of 180 voters would be no less reliable than a poll of 780 voters.
January 28th, 2011 at 3:30 pm
We have three polls taken within about a month of each other, tending to mutually confirm that Romney is in the twenties, about 12-15 points below where he was last time.
It’s very early, of course, with a lot of undecideds, but that’s not impressive.
January 28th, 2011 at 3:35 pm
Let’s stop talking about and lending legitimacy to PPP now… the only people who seem to care about PPP are Huckabee supporters who cling to PPP polls as the only hope for their candidate.
Let’s talk about how much of a hack Matt C is.
Or we can talk about how PPP clearly outperformed Romney in 2008 and 2010.
Or we can talk about how 24 percent and a 5 point lead in THIS poll of a state Romney carried with 39 percent should be cause for concern for Romney supporters.
That Romney is barely ahead in one of his three “home” states is not at all a cause for celebration.
January 28th, 2011 at 3:36 pm
PPP clearly outperformed Rasmussen is what the last post should have said.
Then again Rasmussen and Romney appear to be on the same team.
January 28th, 2011 at 3:38 pm
North Carolina GOP primary:
November: Huckabee 25, Palin 21, Gingrich 17, Romney 10, Ron 7
December: Gingrich 21, Palin 21, Huckabee 18, Romney 18, Ron 7
January: Huckabee 27, Gingrich 18, Palin 16, Romney 11, Pawlenty 7
Strange shifts don’t you say?
My guess on NC in reality:
Huckabee 24, Palin 22, Gingrich 17, Romney 13, Ron 7, Pawlenty 7
January 28th, 2011 at 3:40 pm
I get another take from these states that PPP doesn’t want to admit: Huckabee can’t shake away Palin from the pack in Southern states. I keep telling people all she needs is Dems to vote in our primaries and we get our worse nightmare nominee.
January 28th, 2011 at 3:42 pm
20,
Except that in the south, most Dems are either less culturally opposed to Palin, or black, or both. Getting more than a handful of blacks to ever bother voting in a GOP primary is…
Unlikely.
January 28th, 2011 at 3:51 pm
Not a very good omen for Mitt. He had 40% more when he ran in 2008.
January 28th, 2011 at 5:01 pm
Matt C,
Huck and Romney are within the MoE on this poll.
January 28th, 2011 at 5:07 pm
Hi Guys
What is the amazing disconnect between the PPP polling data and so many other polls ? The mechanics of sampling may account for some and the wide MOE’s, but they seem to have a consistent distance between other polling data in other states that I suspect will continue to be reflected in comparative polling over the next several months. They seem to be polling their own expectations and hopes. Don’t get it. Any ideas ? If they were closer, I wouldn’t see a problem with their results……but they’re not
CraigS
January 28th, 2011 at 5:07 pm
This is a very poor showing for Romney… this should be a slam dunk for him. If Romney doesn’t pull out more than 5-6 points, it kills any momentum he hoped to get out of this state. Huckabee with a close second gets the mo. Expectations are everything.
January 28th, 2011 at 5:13 pm
LOL……The non-Huckabee anti-Romney gang led by Bob Hovic and Jonathan continue to find DOOOOOOOOOOOOM in every poll Romney has a lead but see Huckabee as the frontrunner because he has some kind of a lead in some polls.
Interesting, Romney has to completely blow everybody out or he’s DOOOOOOOOOMED.
Considering Palin is in the news 24/7 and Huckabee and Gingrich are putting their best foot forward to a national GOP audience sevaral tims a week via their FOX gigs, etc., while the anti-Romney crowd is doing their RomneyCare Voodoo dance around the clock, I don’t think Mitt is doing too bad all things considered.
It most certainly is way too early to start the DOOOOOMED chant don’t you think boys?
January 28th, 2011 at 5:45 pm
Romney is DOOOOOMED!
No really, I think he is.
How is Romney going to compete in an age when Republicans aren’t focused on having an “effective CEO”. Romney just isn’t Tea Party material, he’s just not appealing to them at all. Romney supporters continue to be as ignorant of reality as they were in ’08, now by entertaining silly PPP polling conspiracies.
The only advantage Romney has is money. But I don’t think money counts for a whole lot anymore.
January 28th, 2011 at 5:55 pm
#26 Romney’s name recognition is almost as much as Palin or Huckabee’s among Republican voters. He’s a known quantity to Republican voters just as the two of them are. Palin actually isn’t in the news as much as you think. Nate Silver looked at the actual numbers and it’s pretty much a myth.
January 28th, 2011 at 5:56 pm
#24 PPP may be more favorable to Huckabee just because they poll “typical Republican primary voters” or something along those lines. However, I don’t see how that would hurt Romney considering that he was a candidate in 2008 as well and that he’s supposed to be the guy who appeals to “regular Republicans” and “regular Republicans” would consider themselves typical primary voters. That would probably hurt Palin more than Romney considering that her base probably wouldn’t consider themselves typical Republican primary voters.
But then again, the same argument could be made that these other polls are polling far too many indies by polling all GOP leaning indies. These samples are usually 40-45% indy, something that we probably won’t see even in New Hampshire.
January 28th, 2011 at 6:00 pm
Republicans, particularly the ones who vote in primaries, don’t want what Romney is selling.
A “next in line” ought not be at 20 percent nationally. Even Giuliani was able to build up 35-40 percent in national polls based on name ID.
I don’t know who the nominee will be – but everything we’ve seen over the past two years suggests that the “throw the establishment bums out” sentiment applies strongly. Especially to the prim and proper blue bloods like Romney. It may not be nice and it may not be fair – but it’s reality.
When the GOP got the chance to get rid of Specter for deviations from party orthodoxy – they did.
When the GOP got the chance to get rid of Bennett in Utah for “impurities” – they did.
Charlie Crist. Check. And he had a ton of cash at the beginning too. What good did it do?
Mike Castle. Check.
Lisa Murkowski. Check. (And Romney can’t win and wouldn’t try to win using a 3rd party route, ala Murkowski).
What makes any Romney supporters honestly believe that the man who gleefully engineered the beta version of ObamaCare won’t suffer a similar fate is beyond me.
January 28th, 2011 at 6:17 pm
I’ve been away from this site for a few hours. I have done a little research and calculations.
I think I have the correct dates so the actual polling results should be fairly easy to find on Aron’s blog posts. I would have included the links here; but the site would think I was spamming and might not post the information.
I only have 3 states to compare; but does PPP really lean that much more toward Huckabee?
Iowa:
PPP 1/11/11 Huckabee 30% compared to SN 1/25/11 27.56% (2.44 point difference)
PPP 1/11/11 Romney 18% compared to SN 1/25/11 18.54% (0.54 point difference)
Michigan:
PPP 12/10/10 Huckabee 22% compared to SN 1/28/11 18.8% (difference of 3.2 points)
PPP 1/11/10 Romney 22% compared to SN 1/25/11 24.4% (difference of 2.4 points)
New Hampshire:
PPP 1/9/10 Huckabee 13% compared to SN 1/25/11 13.83% (difference of 0.83 points)
PPP 1/11/10 Romney 40% compared to SN 1/25/11 33.51% (difference of 6.41 points – but it sure doesn’t look like PPP was trying to make things look all that great for Mike)
January 28th, 2011 at 6:28 pm
And on cue, this article from Politico:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/48336.html
January 28th, 2011 at 6:40 pm
Adam X
The reality is likely to be 4 more years of Obama.
Want a good read ? Read ” Colonel Roosevelt ” by Edwin Morris, about TR, particularly the 1912 campaign. Exactly 100 years ago. Think Tea Party —Bull Moose. Then, think Wilson – Obama. Very interesting and depressing
CraigS
January 28th, 2011 at 6:41 pm
I absolutely agree. If the election were today, Obama would win.
And it sucks.
January 28th, 2011 at 6:57 pm
“Think Tea Party —Bull Moose.” Except Bull Moose was not fiscally responsible like the Tea Party is today.
January 28th, 2011 at 7:18 pm
Jerald:“LOL……The non-Huckabee anti-Romney gang led by Bob Hovic and Jonathan continue to find DOOOOOOOOOOOOM in every poll Romney has a lead but see Huckabee as the frontrunner because he has some kind of a lead in some polls.”
Thanks for promoting me to leader (or co-leader), but I think you have someone else in mind, since I don’t recall saying Huckabee is the frontrunner in this or any other thread.
“It most certainly is way too early to start the DOOOOOMED chant don’t you think boys?”
Probably, which is why I said merely that it’s not an impressive showing and also, as you did, that it’s early yet.
Strawman much?
January 28th, 2011 at 7:18 pm
The nomination will come down to Romney and Huckabee. The trend in this and many recent polls is that (1) Romney is clearly doing something wrong (2) Huckabee is clearly doing something right.
January 28th, 2011 at 7:26 pm
30.
What makes any Romney supporters honestly believe that the man who gleefully engineered the beta version of ObamaCare won’t suffer a similar fate is beyond me.
===========
^^^^^^^^^^^WINNER^^^^^^^^^^^^
The healthcare issue is not going away. NH will not be a “piece of cake” for Romney. Everyone will attack including Pawlenty, Tea Party 527s, Huckabee, Bachman etc.
January 28th, 2011 at 8:32 pm
Tea Party sentiments are much more at home with the social conservatism and quasi-populism of Huckabee than they are with the corporatism and progressivism Romney is associated with.
You’re asking a party that has brought in millions of working class voters since Reagan’s time to vote for the fellow “who looks like the guy that laid you off” in Huckabee’s words. You’re asking for a party that is now very Jacksonian, very anti-federal government, very anti-elitist, and very conservative, to vote for a whig, eastern-establishment, big money politician.
That’s Romney’s dilemma.
January 28th, 2011 at 9:14 pm
Some of you are not nearly as smart as you purport to be. With a large field of candidates, you can’t expect to be as high as last time after the field had narrowed. Also, Mitt has purposely been flying under the radar, so I think he’s doing quite well considering that. MPC, your logic continutes to disappoint. You’re smarter than this!!
January 28th, 2011 at 11:02 pm
Huckabee isn’t running, and Sarah probably isn’t either. Romney has done well in polling confined to Tea Party supporters and has excellent prospects against the field, but there are plenty of prospects out there to put that proposition to the test.
Anybody who doesn’t like Mitt should find a 2nd-Tier candidate to support. As prospective Presidential candidates, any one of them you choose will be a step up from the Huckster or Sarah, because any one of them will be more electable….and make a better President.
January 29th, 2011 at 7:07 am
“Some of you are not nearly as smart as you purport to be.” And that includes you IG. Hello, this is essentially a home state of Mr. Romney, he should be doing much better than he is. Nice spinning.
January 29th, 2011 at 5:45 pm
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by comMITTed to Romney, Ben Michaud. Ben Michaud said: RT @C0MM1TT3D: Poll Watch – Strategic National 2012 Michigan Republican Primary Poll: http://tinyurl.com/45mxko5 [...]